Something that I hear very frequently from Protestants is that the Dead Sea Scrolls are the most important biblical documents ever found, and that they are the oldest and revolutionized biblical history etc. And none of it makes sense to me. Why is this so important when you have the Septuagint--which is what we Orthodox Christians have been using--is older than the Dead Sea Scrolls by at least 150 years? The Septuagint was composed in the 3rd century BC whereas most scholars estimate that the DSCs were only composed somewhere between 150 BC to AD 70?

Something that I hear very frequently from Protestants is that the Dead Sea Scrolls are the most important biblical documents ever found, and that they are the oldest and revolutionized biblical history etc. And none of it makes sense to me. Why is this so important when you have the Septuagint--which is what we Orthodox Christians have been using--is older than the Dead Sea Scrolls by at least 150 years? The Septuagint was composed in the 3rd century BC whereas most scholars estimate that the DSCs were only composed somewhere between 150 BC to AD 70?

A group of documents called the Septuagint, created that early, wouldn't have had deuterocanonical books in it. There is no single "Septuagint," but many versions of it. Any surviving texts from before the 4th century are pure gold.

Something that I hear very frequently from Protestants is that the Dead Sea Scrolls are the most important biblical documents ever found, and that they are the oldest and revolutionized biblical history etc. And none of it makes sense to me. Why is this so important when you have the Septuagint--which is what we Orthodox Christians have been using--is older than the Dead Sea Scrolls by at least 150 years? The Septuagint was composed in the 3rd century BC whereas most scholars estimate that the DSCs were only composed somewhere between 150 BC to AD 70?

A group of documents called the Septuagint, created that early, wouldn't have had deuterocanonical books in it. There is no single "Septuagint," but many versions of it. Any surviving texts from before the 4th century are pure gold.

You mean I can't believe Ptolmenly II commissioned 70 Jewish rabbis in single cells and all came out with the exact same translation?

Lame.

Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

Something that I hear very frequently from Protestants is that the Dead Sea Scrolls are the most important biblical documents ever found, and that they are the oldest and revolutionized biblical history etc. And none of it makes sense to me. Why is this so important when you have the Septuagint--which is what we Orthodox Christians have been using--is older than the Dead Sea Scrolls by at least 150 years? The Septuagint was composed in the 3rd century BC whereas most scholars estimate that the DSCs were only composed somewhere between 150 BC to AD 70?

Where do you get the idea that the Dead Sea Scrolls are that important to Protestants?

I wonder, and this is just a guess, if some of the neo-Protestants and/or Messianic Jews have been claiming that the Scrolls are a better foundational text than the Septuagint, just to challenge the legitimacy of the older liturgical churches. They try to make up a lot of odd theories. It wouldn't surprise me if they did that again.

Logged

He will come again with glory to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom will have no end.

Something that I hear very frequently from Protestants is that the Dead Sea Scrolls are the most important biblical documents ever found, and that they are the oldest and revolutionized biblical history etc. And none of it makes sense to me. Why is this so important when you have the Septuagint--which is what we Orthodox Christians have been using--is older than the Dead Sea Scrolls by at least 150 years? The Septuagint was composed in the 3rd century BC whereas most scholars estimate that the DSCs were only composed somewhere between 150 BC to AD 70?

Where do you get the idea that the Dead Sea Scrolls are that important to Protestants?

Because in Jr. High when I attended a Protestant school there was a 'Bible' class and the teacher was obsessed with the Dead Sea Scrolls espouting all types of odd theories as to why they are so important. Theories that I am discovering were false now that I am older and able to look into it myself.

I've heard the Dead Sea Scrolls are important to Orthodox Christians because they confirm Septuagint readings of the Old Testament as opposed to the Masoretic text.

I've heard the same thing. The wording is more similar to the Septuagint than to the Masoretic. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint probably are descended from the same "ancestor" text, whereas the Masoretic seems to come from a different tradition.

Something that I hear very frequently from Protestants is that the Dead Sea Scrolls are the most important biblical documents ever found, and that they are the oldest and revolutionized biblical history etc. And none of it makes sense to me. Why is this so important when you have the Septuagint--which is what we Orthodox Christians have been using--is older than the Dead Sea Scrolls by at least 150 years? The Septuagint was composed in the 3rd century BC whereas most scholars estimate that the DSCs were only composed somewhere between 150 BC to AD 70?

Where do you get the idea that the Dead Sea Scrolls are that important to Protestants?

Because in Jr. High when I attended a Protestant school there was a 'Bible' class and the teacher was obsessed with the Dead Sea Scrolls spouting all types of odd theories as to why they are so important. Theories that I am discovering were false now that I am older and able to look into it myself.

Yeah, too many people watch speculative shows on the History Channel and think every odd strand of ideas should be followed. Isn't Dan Brown about due for another silly book soon?

Logged

He will come again with glory to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom will have no end.

I am glad you brought this up. It just so happens that there is an exhibit just opening today at the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary,not far from were I live, displaying some of the fragments that have been held in a private collection for several years,but now being made known to the public. You asked why they are so important to Protestants? Well I have inserted a link that my answer some of those questions.

In regards to the Canon of Scripture,Protestants will view the Dead Sea Scrolls much like they do Early Church History,they will pick and choose what they want to believe. Much of the reason they reject the Catholic/Orthodox Canon,is primarily because many of the original texts where not composed in Hebrew,and they use various sources such as Jerome,and others as a buttress to uphold their objections,particularly the anti-christian Jewish Council of Jamnia's rejection of the Apocryphal works,but If both they and Jerome had access to the Scrolls,the outcome might have been much different.

I wonder, and this is just a guess, if some of the neo-Protestants and/or Messianic Jews have been claiming that the Scrolls are a better foundational text than the Septuagint, just to challenge the legitimacy of the older liturgical churches. They try to make up a lot of odd theories. It wouldn't surprise me if they did that again.

Regardless of whether or not the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Septuagint best represent the original readings of the various books of the Old Testament, the Dead Sea Scrolls manuscripts are older than any Septuagint manuscripts that we have. Consequently, it does make sense to rely heavily upon them for the more accurate readings of Old Testament books.

Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice. Can you guess what it is?

Something that I hear very frequently from Protestants is that the Dead Sea Scrolls are the most important biblical documents ever found, and that they are the oldest and revolutionized biblical history etc. And none of it makes sense to me. Why is this so important when you have the Septuagint--which is what we Orthodox Christians have been using--is older than the Dead Sea Scrolls by at least 150 years? The Septuagint was composed in the 3rd century BC whereas most scholars estimate that the DSCs were only composed somewhere between 150 BC to AD 70?

A group of documents called the Septuagint, created that early, wouldn't have had deuterocanonical books in it. There is no single "Septuagint," but many versions of it. Any surviving texts from before the 4th century are pure gold.

Dude, we need to take turns doing this. I do get tired of making the point.

I am glad you brought this up. It just so happens that there is an exhibit just opening today at the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary,not far from were I live, displaying some of the fragments that have been held in a private collection for several years,but now being made known to the public. You asked why they are so important to Protestants? Well I have inserted a link that my answer some of those questions.

In regards to the Canon of Scripture,Protestants will view the Dead Sea Scrolls much like they do Early Church History,they will pick and choose what they want to believe. Much of the reason they reject the Catholic/Orthodox Canon,is primarily because many of the original texts where not composed in Hebrew,and they use various sources such as Jerome,and others as a buttress to uphold their objections,particularly the anti-christian Jewish Council of Jamnia's rejection of the Apocryphal works,but If both they and Jerome had access to the Scrolls,the outcome might have been much different.

That people still talk about the "Council of Jamnia" amazes me.

Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice. Can you guess what it is?

I've heard the Dead Sea Scrolls are important to Orthodox Christians because they confirm Septuagint readings of the Old Testament as opposed to the Masoretic text.

I've heard the same thing. The wording is more similar to the Septuagint than to the Masoretic. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint probably are descended from the same "ancestor" text, whereas the Masoretic seems to come from a different tradition.

Are there any further studies from Orthodox Christians on the DSS Vs the LXX/Peshitta and even LXX/Peshitta vs DSS and also is there any comparison online DSS vs Masoretic Text (10C AD).